B-202609.OM, DEC 23, 1981

B-202609.OM: Dec 23, 1981

Additional Materials:

Contact:

Edda Emmanuelli Perez
(202) 512-2853
EmmanuelliPerezE@gao.gov

 

Office of Public Affairs
(202) 512-4800
youngc1@gao.gov

GGD: THIS REFERS TO QUESTIONS WHICH WE WERE ASKED TO CONSIDER BY MARK E. HEATWOLE OF YOUR DIVISION IN CONNECTION WITH A REVIEW HE IS NOW COMPLETING OF FEDERAL PAPERWORK ISSUES RELATED TO EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS. POSSIBLE CONFLICTS IN REVIEW AUTHORITY OVER EDUCATION-RELATED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS WERE CREATED BY PASSAGE OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT. NO EXCEPTION WAS MADE FOR EDUCATION-RELATED REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING SINCE A PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT WAS TO CONSOLIDATE REVIEW OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO "COORDINATE. THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT'S EFFECT ON EDUCATION'S PRE-EXISTING AUTHORITY IS MORE FULLY DISCUSSED IN RESPONSE TO MR. WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED BELOW: QUESTION 1: WHAT CONSTITUTES AN EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION UNDER THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS OF 1978?

B-202609.OM, DEC 23, 1981

SUBJECT: QUESTIONS RAISED CONCERNING INTERPRETATION OF CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS OF 1978 IN CONJUNCTION WITH PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT - B-202609-O.M.

DIRECTOR, GGD:

THIS REFERS TO QUESTIONS WHICH WE WERE ASKED TO CONSIDER BY MARK E. HEATWOLE OF YOUR DIVISION IN CONNECTION WITH A REVIEW HE IS NOW COMPLETING OF FEDERAL PAPERWORK ISSUES RELATED TO EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS. UNDERSTAND THAT HIS PRELIMINARY FINDINGS INDICATE THAT CONFUSION EXISTS AS TO THE SCOPE OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION'S RESPONSIBILITIES WITH REGARD TO REVIEW OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS PLACED ON EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND OTHERS IN LIGHT OF THE RECENT AMENDMENT OF THE EDUCATION ACT BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, PUB.L. NO. 96-511, 94 STAT. 2812, DEC. 11, 1980.

PRIOR TO ENACTMENT IN 1980 OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, CONGRESS ATTEMPTED TO PROVIDE FOR COORDINATION OF EDUCATION-RELATED INFORMATION COLLECTIONS, FIRST WITHIN THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION AND WELFARE AND LATER IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (EDUCATION). PUB.L. NO. 90-247, SEC. 400A, AS ADDED BY PUB.L. NO. 95-561, SEC. 1212(B), 92 STAT. 2338, NOV. 1, 1978, AND AMENDED BY PUB.L. NO. 96-46, SEC. 4(A), 93 STAT. 342, AUG. 6, 1979, CODIFIED AT 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3 (SUPP. III, 1976). (THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS.)

POSSIBLE CONFLICTS IN REVIEW AUTHORITY OVER EDUCATION-RELATED REPORTING REQUIREMENTS WERE CREATED BY PASSAGE OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, SUPRA, WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE ON APRIL 1, 1981. IT GAVE THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET (OMB) GENERAL POWERS TO DEVELOP, COORDINATE AND IMPLEMENT INFORMATION POLICIES AND INSTRUCTED HIM TO DIRECT AND OVERSEE:

"*** THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUESTS, THE REDUCTION OF THE PAPERWORK BURDEN, FEDERAL STATISTICAL ACTIVITIES, RECORDS MANAGEMENT ACTIVITIES, PRIVACY OF RECORDS, INTERAGENCY SHARING OF INFORMATION, AND ACQUISITION AND USE OF AUTOMATIC DATA PROCESSING TELECOMMUNICATIONS, AND OTHER TECHNOLOGY FOR MANAGING INFORMATION RESOURCES. ***" 44 U.S.C.A. SEC. 3504(A) (1980 LAWS SUPP.).

NO EXCEPTION WAS MADE FOR EDUCATION-RELATED REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING SINCE A PRIMARY PURPOSE OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT WAS TO CONSOLIDATE REVIEW OF REPORTING REQUIREMENTS IN ORDER TO "COORDINATE, INTEGRATE AND, TO THE EXTENT PRACTICABLE AND APPROPRIATE, MAKE UNIFORM FEDERAL INFORMATION POLICIES AND PRACTICES." 44 U.S.C.A. SEC. 3501(4) (1980 LAWS SUPP.). IN FACT, THE VERSION OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT ORIGINALLY PASSED BY THE HOUSE REPEALED THE EDUCATION ACT'S CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS TO GIVE SOLE REVIEW AUTHORITY TO THE DIRECTOR OF OMB. HOWEVER, AS FINALLY APPROVED BY CONGRESS, THE ACT PERMITTED EDUCATION TO RETAIN MOST OF ITS FORMER REVIEW FUNCTIONS AND, TO SOME EXTENT, EXPANDED THEM, BUT GAVE FINAL REVIEW AUTHORITY TO OMB. SEE H.REPT. NO. 96-835, 96TH CONG., 2D SESS. 20-21 (1980), ANSWER 1, SUPRA AT 3, ANSWER 2, SUPRA, AT 4- 6. THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT'S EFFECT ON EDUCATION'S PRE-EXISTING AUTHORITY IS MORE FULLY DISCUSSED IN RESPONSE TO MR. HEATWOLE'S QUESTIONS, WHICH ARE SUMMARIZED BELOW:

QUESTION 1: WHAT CONSTITUTES AN EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION UNDER THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS OF 1978? PUB.L. NO. 95-561, SUPRA. WHAT CRITERIA SHOULD BE USED TO DETERMINE IF THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION IS COMPLYING WITH THIS LAW?

ANSWER 1: AN "EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION" IS DEFINED BY SECTION (A)(2)(C) OF THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS OF 1978 (20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3(A)(2)(C) (SUPP. III, 1979)) AS "ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE AGENCY OR INSTITUTION OFFERING EDUCATION PROGRAMS." THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THIS SECTION CLEARLY INDICATES CONGRESSIONAL CONCERN OVER THE AMOUNT OF PAPERWORK BEING GENERATED BY FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND A DESIRE TO LIMIT THE BURDEN IMPOSED ON THE PUBLIC BY CENTRALIZING THE CONTROL FUNCTION IN ONE AGENCY. THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN, REPRESENTATIVE PERKINS, DESCRIBED THE BROAD SCOPE OF THE SECTION IN PRESENTING THE CONFERENCE REPORT ON THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1978 (OF WHICH THE PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS WERE A PART) TO THE HOUSE:

"THE CONFERENCE REPORT ALSO TRIES TO DEAL WITH THE PROBLEM OF OVERALL CONTROL OF PAPERWORK THROUGHOUT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. ONE CENTRAL COORDINATING BODY TO BE ESTABLISHED BY THE SECRETARY OF HEW IS PROPOSED FOR ALL PAPERWORK AFFECTING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS. THE AGENCY MUST NOT APPROVE ANY UNNECESSARY, DUPLICATIVE, OR EXCESSIVELY DETAILED REQUEST FOR PAPERWORK FROM ANY FEDERAL AGENCY." 124 CONG., REC. 38542 (1978).

IN LIGHT OF THE CLEAR LANGUAGE OF THE APPLICABLE DEFINITION AND THE EXPRESSED PURPOSE OF THE AMENDMENT - TO COVER "ALL PAPERWORK AFFECTING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS" - THE ACT MUST BE BROADLY READ TO COVER ALL PUBLIC AND PRIVATE INSTITUTIONS OFFERING ANY PROGRAMS THAT COULD BE CONSIDERED EDUCATIONAL. THEREFORE, EDUCATION WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR COORDINATING COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION BY FEDERAL AGENCIES WHEN DIRECTED PRIMARILY TO INSTITUTIONS OFFERING EDUCATION PROGRAMS SUCH AS VOCATIONAL EDUCATION, JOB CORPS AND CETA TRAINING, BAR REVIEW COURSES, CORRESPONDENCE COURSES, PILOT TRAINING AND SIMILAR PROGRAMS IN ADDITION TO PRIVATE AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES.

EDUCATION'S INTERIM FEDERAL EDUCATION ACQUISITION COUNCIL (FEDAC) REVIEW PROCEDURES, ISSUED IN 1979, DEFINED "EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION" AS "ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE AGENCY OR INSTITUTION WHOSE PRIMARY FUNCTION IS EDUCATION." FEDAC INTERIM PROCEDURES, SEC. 4, 44 FED.REG. 46538 (1979). IN ITS ACCOMPANYING COMMENT, EDUCATION EXPLAINS:

"WE INTERPRET 'EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION' TO MEAN ANY PUBLIC OR PRIVATE AGENCY OR INSTITUTION WHOSE PRINCIPAL FUNCTION IS EDUCATION. THIS INCLUDES STATE AND LOCAL EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES, SCHOOLS, COLLEGES, OTHER INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER EDUCATION, EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH GROUPS. IT DOES NOT INCLUDE, FOR EXAMPLE, HOSPITALS OR CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES."

ID. AT 46536.

ALTHOUGH THIS DEFINITION NARROWED THE BROAD DEFINITION OF "EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION" SET OUT IN THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS OF 1978, A SUBSEQUENTLY ENACTED PROVISION OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, DISCUSSED BELOW, IN EFFECT SUPERSEDED IT.

ALTHOUGH FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR EDUCATION-RELATED REPORTING WAS VESTED IN OMB BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, SUPRA, SECTION 4(A) OF THE ACT SIGNIFICANTLY EXPANDED THE SCOPE OF EDUCATION'S AUTHORITY TO REVIEW EDUCATION-RELATED MATTERS PRIOR TO THEIR REFERRAL TO OMB FOR FINAL APPROVAL. PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF THAT PROVISION, THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION HAD REVIEW AUTHORITY ONLY WHEN THE RESPONDENTS WERE PRIMARILY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUEST WAS TO OBTAIN "INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF OR THE FORMULATION OF POLICY RELATED TO FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS." BOTH CRITERIA HAD TO BE MET. THEREFORE, QUESTIONNAIRES RELATED TO FORMULATION OF FEDERAL EDUCATION POLICY WERE SUBJECT TO EDUCATION REVIEW ONLY IF PRIMARILY DIRECTED TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS. AMONG OTHER CHANGES, THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT CHANGED THE "AND" IN EDUCATION'S JURISDICTION CRITERIA TO "OR". NOW ALL FEDERAL COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION DIRECTED PRIMARILY TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, REGARDLESS OF THEIR SUBJECT MATTER, ARE SUBJECT TO COORDINATION AND REVIEW BY EDUCATION. ALSO, ALL FEDERAL QUESTIONNAIRES OR OTHER DATA COLLECTIONS REQUESTING "INFORMATION NEEDED FOR THE MANAGEMENT OF, OR THE FORMULATION OF, POLICY RELATED TO FEDERAL EDUCATION OR RESEARCH OR EVALUATION STUDIES RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS" ARE SUBJECT TO EDUCATION JURISDICTION EVEN IF NOT PRIMARILY DIRECTED TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS.

WHILE THE STATUTE NOW REQUIRES EDUCATION TO REVIEW QUESTIONNAIRES DIRECTED TO ORGANIZATIONS THAT ARE NOT PRIMARILY EDUCATIONAL, BY ITS TERMS EDUCATION'S AUTHORITY OVER INFORMATION COLLECTIONS BY SUCH ORGANIZATIONS WOULD BE LIMITED TO COLLECTIONS CONCERNED WITH EDUCATION POLICY OR EDUCATIONAL FUNCTIONS. FOR EXAMPLE, MR. HEATWOLE ASKED WHAT EDUCATION'S REVIEW RESPONSIBILITY WOULD BE IN A SITUATION WHERE A LARGE CORPORATION HAS A VOCATIONAL EDUCATION DIVISION. FOR THAT LIMITED FUNCTION IT WOULD FIT THE DEFINITION OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION. BUT CLEARLY A QUESTIONNAIRE CONCERNING ITS ANTIPOLLUTION POLICIES WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO EDUCATION'S REVIEW UNLESS DIRECTED TO THE VOCATIONAL EDUCATION DIVISION'S EFFORTS IN THAT AREA.

MS. MCGRAW, OF YOUR STAFF, ORALLY REQUESTED US TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE INTERIM FEDAC REVIEW PROCEDURES HAD INCLUDED STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES IN THE DEFINITION OF "INSTITUTION". THESE PROCEDURES STATED THAT FEDAC INTERPRETED THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS TO PERMIT REVIEW WHENEVER A QUESTIONNAIRE OR OTHER INFORMATION COLLECTION DEVICE WAS PRIMARILY DIRECTED TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS AND INTERPRETED THIS TO BE:

"1. WHENEVER A MAJORITY (OVER 50 PERCENT) OF THE RESPONDENTS ARE EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES OR INSTITUTIONS (INCLUDING THEIR EMPLOYEES OR STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES), OR WHEN THE ASSISTANCE OF THE EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES OR INSTITUTIONS IS REQUIRED FOR THE DATA COLLECTION." 44 FED.REG. 46536, AUG. 8, 1979.

IT APPEARS THAT STUDENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES COULD BE INCLUDED IN DETERMINING THE PERCENTAGE OF RESPONDENTS UNDER THIS PROCEDURE ONLY WHEN THEIR RESPONSES RELATED TO THEIR ROLES AS STUDENTS OR FAMILIES OF STUDENTS. THEY WOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE EDUCATIONAL "INSTITUTIONS" BUT MERELY AS INDIVIDUALS AFFECTED BY EDUCATIONAL POLICIES AND THEREFORE CONSIDERED UNDER FEDAC PROCEDURES FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING WHETHER AN INFORMATION COLLECTION DEVICE WAS NORMALLY DIRECTED TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS.

SINCE ENACTMENT OF THE 1980 PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, THE DETERMINATION OF WHEN A STUDENT OR HIS PARENT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED IN DETERMINING WHETHER A COLLECTION DEVICE IS PRIMARILY DIRECTED TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS BECOMES OF LITTLE SIGNIFICANCE. VIRTUALLY ANY FACTUAL SITUATION IN WHICH THE QUESTION OF WHETHER A FORM IS BEING DIRECTED PRIMARILY TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS WOULD APPEAR TO BE RELATED TO FORMULATION OR MANAGEMENT OF FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND THUS FIT UNDER THE ALTERNATIVE REVIEW CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY THOSE AMENDMENTS. SEE 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221- 3(A)(1)(A)(II) (SUPP. III, 1979, AS AMENDED BY PUB.L. NO. 96-511, SUPRA.)

QUESTION 2: THROUGH ITS AMENDMENT OF THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS BY SECTION 4(A) OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, DID CONGRESS EXPECT EDUCATION TO ASSUME A SOLELY PASSIVE ROLE LEAVING OMB AND AGENCIES TO DETERMINE WHAT FORMS OR OTHER REPORTING REQUIREMENTS SHOULD BE SUBMITTED FOR ITS EXAMINATION? OR SHOULD EDUCATION ASSUME MONITORING RESPONSIBILITIES TO ASSURE IT IS REVIEWING OR COORDINATING ALL COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION IN THE EDUCATION AREA? FURTHER, CAN OMB OR EDUCATION REQUIRE AGENCIES TO SEND PHOTOCOPIES OF THEIR SUBMISSIONS TO BOTH OMB AND EDUCATION?

ANSWER 2: THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASED THE REVIEW AUTHORITY OF EDUCATION "TO BRING ALL PRIMARILY EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION REQUESTS THROUGH THE FEDERAL DATA ACQUISITION COUNCIL (FEDAC) AND THE SECRETARY'S REVIEW PROCESS." SEN.REPT. NO. 96-930, 96TH CONG., 2D SESS. 58 (1980). THE ACT ALSO RESTORED OMB'S FINAL REVIEW AUTHORITY OVER EDUCATION INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUESTS, WHICH HAD BEEN REDUCED BY THE 1978 ACT TO REVIEW OF ADVERSE ACTIONS AT THE REQUEST OF AGGRIEVED AGENCIES. THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS CHANGE WAS NOTED IN THE SENATE REPORT WHICH STATED:

"THIS CHANGE TO THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISION ACT RESTORES TO THE DIRECTOR OF OMB ULTIMATE CLEARANCE AUTHORITY FOR EDUCATIONAL INFORMATION COLLECTION ACTIVITIES. ***" IBID.

CONCERNED OVER DUPLICATION OF AUTHORITY, THE VERSION OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT ORIGINALLY APPROVED BY THE HOUSE REPEALED THE REVIEW AND COORDINATION AUTHORITY PROVIDED EDUCATION BY THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS. BUT THE HOUSE EVENTUALLY ACCEDED TO THE SENATE'S RETENTION AND EXPANSION OF EDUCATION'S AUTHORITY BECAUSE THE SENATE BILL GAVE OMB THE FINAL AUTHORITY TO APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE EACH COLLECTION PROPOSAL. THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT REFLECTED CONGRESS' CONCERN OVER THE DECENTRALIZATION OF PAPERWORK CONTROL, PRIMARILY AMONG OMB, GAO AND EDUCATION, AND A DESIRE TO PUT ONE AGENCY IN A POSITION TO EXERT GOVERNMENT-WIDE REVIEW OVER FEDERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS. THE HOUSE'S ACCEPTANCE OF THE SENATE VERSION, INCREASING EDUCATION'S JURISDICTION IN THIS AREA INSTEAD OF REPEALING IT, APPEARS TO RECOGNIZE THE UNIQUE STATUS OF THE REPORTING BURDEN IMPOSED ON EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS. IT REFLECTS A CONGRESSIONAL INTENT THAT THE AGENCY PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH DISTRIBUTING FEDERAL EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE AND HAVING THE GREATEST EXPERTISE IN THIS AREA SHOULD "REVIEW AND COORDINATE ALL COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION AND DATA ACQUISITION ACTIVITIES" BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT IN THE EDUCATION AREA. THE EXPANSION OF THE EDUCATION'S AUTHORITY AND REQUIREMENT THAT "NO INDEPENDENT SUBMISSION TO THE DIRECTOR OF OMB SHALL BE REQUIRED UNDER SUCH ACT" INDICATES THAT EDUCATION SHOULD MAKE THE INITIAL DETERMINATION OF WHETHER AN EDUCATION-RELATED INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST SHOULD BE INITIALLY REVIEWED BY OMB OR EDUCATION. WHILE THE ULTIMATE DISAPPROVAL AUTHORITY IS IN OMB, THE COORDINATION AND REVIEW FUNCTIONS VESTED IN EDUCATION REQUIRE IT TO SEE ALL COLLECTIONS RELATED TO EDUCATION POLICY.

CONGRESS' ASSIGNMENT TO EDUCATION OF A COORDINATING ROLE FOR ALL COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION RELATED TO EDUCATIONAL POLICY OR PRIMARILY DIRECTED TO EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS APPEARS TO ENVISION AN ACTIVE ROLE FOR THE AGENCY TO ASSURE THAT ASSOCIATED PAPERWORK BURDENS ARE MINIMIZED. THIS WOULD REQUIRE EDUCATION TO OVERSEE AND REVIEW THE EFFORTS OF ALL AGENCIES IN THE AREA AND TO TAKE STEPS TO ASSURE COMPLIANCE WITH REVIEW REQUIREMENTS. CONGRESS DID NOT RESTRICT EDUCATION TO MERELY WAITING FOR AGENCY SUBMISSIONS AND COOPERATION. FOR EXAMPLE, 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221- 3(B)(1) REQUIRES THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION TO DIRECT EACH AGENCY TO SUBMIT A PLAN FOR EACH DATA ACQUISITION ACTIVITY AND EACH COLLECTION OF INFORMATION. THE SECRETARY IS ALSO PERMITTED TO MODIFY EACH AGENCY'S INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST AFTER HIS REVIEW. 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221- 3(B)(4) (SUPP. III, 1979).

WITH REGARD TO THE QUESTION CONCERNING WHETHER OMB OR EDUCATION CAN REQUIRE AGENCIES TO SEND PHOTOCOPIES OF THEIR SUBMISSIONS TO BOTH OMB AND EDUCATION, SECTION 4(A)(2) OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT AMENDED SECTION 400A OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT TO PROVIDE:

"*** IF A REQUIREMENT FOR INFORMATION IS SUBMITTED PURSUANT TO THIS ACT FOR REVIEW TO THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, THE TIMETABLE FOR THE DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL ESTABLISHED IN SECTION 3507 OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT OF 1980 SHALL COMMENCE ON THE DATE THE REQUEST IS SUBMITTED, AND NO INDEPENDENT SUBMISSION TO THE DIRECTOR SHALL BE REQUIRED UNDER SUCH ACT."

THIS AMENDMENT TO 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3(A)(3)(B) BARS OMB OR EDUCATION FROM REQUIRING OTHER AGENCIES TO SEND PHOTOCOPIES OF THEIR SUBMISSION TO BOTH OMB AND EDUCATION. THE SENATE GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS COMMITTEE, WHICH PROPOSED THIS AMENDMENT, STATED IN ITS REPORT:

"*** THIS AMENDMENT DOES NOT DELAY THE CLEARANCE PROCESS AND REQUIRE TWO INDEPENDENT SUBMISSIONS AND REVIEWS. ONCE THE INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION THE 60 DAYS (30 DAY EXTENSION OPTION) APPROVAL TIME ESTABLISHED IN SECTION 3507 OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT SHALL APPLY. WITHIN A MAXIMUM PERIOD OF 90 DAYS THE REQUESTING AGENCY SHOULD KNOW OF THE DIRECTOR'S APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL DECISION."

SEN.REPT. NO. 96-930, 96TH CONG., 2D SESS. 58 (1980).

THE SECTION APPEARS TO ANTICIPATE THAT EDUCATION WILL MAKE SOME ARRANGEMENT WITH OMB SO THAT IT WILL RECEIVE A COPY OF EACH SUBMISSION AND, AS NOTED ABOVE, STARTS THE TIME PERIOD FOR OMB AS WELL AS EDUCATION REVIEW, BUT SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS THE BURDEN OF MAKING DUPLICATE SUBMISSION FROM BEING PASSED TO THE SUBMITTING AGENCY.

QUESTION 3: THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS, SUPRA, AT 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3(B)(2)(A), REQUIRE THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION TO ASSURE THAT:

"(A) NO INFORMATION OR DATA WILL BE REQUESTED OF ANY EDUCATIONAL AGENCY OR INSTITUTION UNLESS THAT REQUEST HAS BEEN APPROVED AND PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY THE FEBRUARY 15 IMMEDIATELY PRECEDING THE BEGINNING OF THE NEW SCHOOL YEAR, UNLESS THERE IS AN URGENT NEED FOR THIS INFORMATION OR A VERY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE EXISTS REGARDING IT;".

BY PUBLISHING BOTH APPROVED AND PROPOSED DATA REQUIREMENTS IN THE FEBRUARY 15TH FEDERAL REGISTER, WHEN THE PROPOSED DATA REQUIREMENTS HAVE NOT YET RECEIVED FEDAC CLEARANCE, DOES EDUCATION LEGALLY COMPLY WITH THIS REQUIREMENT? IF NOT, SHOULD GAO RECOMMEND THAT THE PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS NOT BE IMPOSED ON THE PUBLIC?

ANSWER 3: THIS REQUIREMENT OF THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS WAS NOT SUPERCEDED BY THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT. HOWEVER, THE ORIGINAL ACT REQUIRED APPROVAL ONLY BY EDUCATION PRIOR TO FEBRUARY 15 SINCE EDUCATION- RELATED INFORMATION WAS EXEMPT FROM OMB REVIEW PROCEDURES. THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT REIMPOSED OMB'S REVIEW AND APPROVAL AUTHORITY THUS MAKING APPROVAL BY BOTH EDUCATION AND OMB NECESSARY BY THE FEBRUARY 15TH PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE NEW SCHOOL YEAR. WE UNDERSTAND THAT MR. HEATWOLE HAS LEARNED THAT EDUCATION AGREES WITH THIS INTERPRETATION OF THE ACT AND INTENDS TO DISALLOW ANY OF THE COVERED COLLECTIONS NEXT YEAR NOT APPROVED BY BOTH EDUCATION AND OMB PRIOR TO THIS DEADLINE.

THE LEGISLATIVE HISTORY OF THE AMENDMENTS CLEARLY SHOWS THAT ONE OF THE PRIMARY WAYS CONGRESS ANTICIPATED THAT PAPERWORK COULD BE CUT WOULD BE TO GIVE THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS ADEQUATE NOTICE OF ALL INFORMATION COLLECTIONS PLANNED FOR THE FOLLOWING SCHOOL YEAR SO THEY COULD HAVE ADEQUATE TIME TO EXAMINE THE TOTAL BURDEN TO BE IMPOSED, AND TO COMMENT AND OBJECT WHERE THEY FELT SUCH REQUIREMENTS WERE UNNECESSARY. CENTRAL TO THAT OBJECTIVE WAS THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION ASSURE THAT INFORMATION REQUESTS BE "APPROVED AND PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED" BY THE STATED DATE. 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221 3(B)(2)(A) (SUPP. III, 1979).

DURING DEBATE ON THE SECTION, SENATOR PELL EMPHASIZED THE IMPORTANCE OF EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS BEING ABLE TO COMMENT ON INFORMATION COLLECTIONS TO BE IMPOSED ON THEM FOR A SCHOOL YEAR AFTER EXAMINING SUCH REQUIREMENTS IN THEIR TOTALITY, WHEN HE SAID:

"*** FOR THE FIRST TIME, SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES WOULD HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO KNOW OF ALL POTENTIAL DATA REQUESTS WITH WHICH THEY WOULD HAVE TO COMPLY WITHIN THE YEAR, AND WOULD HAVE AN ORDERLY METHOD OF MAKING THEIR COMMENTS - AND COMPLAINTS - KNOWN. DISCUSSING THIS AMENDMENT IN COMMITTEE, I EXPRESSED THE HOPE THAT ITS PROVISIONS WOULD SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE THE PAPER THAT NOW SEEMS TO ACCOMPANY FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS. CONCERN WITH SUCH EXCESSIVE PAPERWORK WAS A MAJOR THEME OF THE HEARINGS OF THE EDUCATION SUBCOMMITTEE ON THIS LEGISLATION." 124 CONG.REC. 27519 (1978).

EDUCATION IS NOT COMPLYING WITH THE REQUIREMENT OF 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221- 3(B)(2)(A) (SUPP. III, 1979) AND THE CLEARLY EXPRESSED INTENT BEHIND THIS SECTION WHEN IT PUBLISHES PROPOSED DATA REQUIREMENTS AS WELL AS FINAL DATA REQUIREMENTS IN THE FEBRUARY 15 FEDERAL REGISTER. A PROPOSED DATA REQUIREMENT WOULD NOT HAVE BEEN "APPROVED" AT THE TIME IT WAS "PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED." AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION IS SUPPOSED TO KNOW BY FEBRUARY 15, EXCEPT IN UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES OR WHEN THERE IS AN "URGENT NEED" FOR THE INFORMATION, WHAT INFORMATION IS GOING TO BE REQUESTED IN THE FOLLOWING YEAR AND IS GIVEN 30 DAYS TO COMMENT TO THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION ON ITS COLLECTION. 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3(B)(3) (SUPP. III, 1979). IF PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS ARE PUBLISHED WITH ALREADY APPROVED ONES, AN INSTITUTION WILL NOT KNOW WHICH REQUIREMENTS WILL BE MODIFIED OR REMOVED DURING THE FEDAC CLEARANCE PROCESS AND SO WILL HAVE NO WAY TO DETERMINE THE TOTAL BURDEN TO BE IMPOSED ON IT, NOR WILL IT KNOW WHETHER DUPLICATE OR UNNECESSARY DEMANDS WILL RESULT. IT WILL BE DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO SEE THE WHOLE INFORMATION COLLECTION PICTURE AND REACT TO THE TOTAL BURDEN, WHICH WAS THE PURPOSE OF THE REQUIREMENT. THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE REPORT ON THE EDUCATION AMENDMENTS OF 1978 SUPPORTS THIS VIEW BY INDICATING THAT ONLY MODIFICATIONS IN FINAL REQUIREMENTS, I.E. "FINE-TUNING", ARE TO BE PERMITTED:

"THE CONFEREES ALSO WISH TO STATE THEIR INTENTION THAT ALL REQUESTS FOR INFORMATION MUST BE APPROVED AND ANNOUNCED BY FEBRUARY 15, BUT THE EXACT DATA COLLECTION INSTRUMENT MAY BE SUBSEQUENTLY MODIFIED IN LIGHT OF THIS REVIEW AND NEED NOT BE DISSEMINATED TO THE RESPONDING AGENCIES BY THAT DATE." H.R.REP. NO. 95-1753, 95TH CONG., 2D SESS. (1978) 314.

FEDAC RECOGNIZED THAT THE FEBRUARY 15 DEADLINE FOR PUBLICATION OF FINAL REQUIREMENTS MAKE IT NECESSARY FOR AGENCIES TO DEVELOP AND SUBMIT THEIR INFORMATION COLLECTION PLANS TO IT FOR APPROVAL LONG BEFORE THAT DEADLINE, WHICH WOULD BE EVEN FURTHER FROM THE COLLECTION DATE. ITS COMMENTS, ACCOMPANYING THE INTERIM PROCEDURES, STATE THAT THE BROAD INTERPRETATION OF THE STATUTORY LANGUAGE TO PERMIT PUBLICATION OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS AS WELL AS APPROVED REGULATIONS WAS NECESSARY TO OVERCOME WHAT IT SAW AS:

"*** MAJOR PROBLEMS IN SOME INSTANCES, ESPECIALLY WHERE THE CONGRESS ENACTS NEW STATUTORY PROGRAMS WITH IMMEDIATE EFFECTIVE DATES REQUIRING NEW APPLICATIONS, REPORTS, EVALUATIONS, AND OTHER DATA ACTIVITIES. ***" 44

FED.REG. 46537 (1979). ALTHOUGH ITS COMMENTS SUGGEST THAT THE PUBLICATION OF A SUMMARY OF AN AGENCY INFORMATION COLLECTION PLAN WITH SUBMISSION OF PROPOSED REGULATIONS FOR APPROVAL BY EDUCATION NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 15 WOULD MEET THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT OF A 7 MONTH LEAD TIME BEFORE COLLECTIONS BEGIN, FEDAC'S PROCEDURES REQUIRE AT LEAST A 30 DAY COMMENT PERIOD AFTER FEDERAL REGISTER PUBLICATION OF THE PLAN SUMMARY, A 45-60 DAY PERIOD FOR COMPLEX REPORTING REQUIREMENTS, AND WAIVER OF ALL NOTICE REQUIREMENTS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES. SINCE THE SECRETARY WOULD THEN HAVE UP TO 30 DAYS AFTER RECEIVING THE COMMENTS TO APPROVE THE PLAN, FINAL APPROVAL MIGHT OCCUR AS LATE AS MAY 15, OR LESS THAN 4 MONTHS BEFORE THE USUAL BEGINNING OF THE ACADEMIC YEAR. FURTHER, PRESENT INTERIM PROCEDURES, WHICH WERE WRITTEN PRIOR TO ENACTMENT OF THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT, MAKE NO PROVISION FOR THE OMB REVIEW PROCESS.

HOWEVER, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT, ALTHOUGH THEY DO NOT COMPLY WITH STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS, FEDAC'S PROCEDURES WOULD MEET TWO OF THE OBJECTIVES OF THE ACT BY PROVIDING NOTICE OF THE EDUCATION-RELATED, INFORMATION COLLECTION PLANS OF THE AGENCIES WELL BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF AN ACADEMIC YEAR AND PROVIDING THE AFFECTED INSTITUTIONS WITH AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON THEM.

WE ARE NOT IN A POSITION TO DETERMINE THE EFFECT OF INVALIDATING THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE NOT PUBLISHED IN FINAL FORM ON FEBRUARY 15. INDICATED, SUCH REQUIREMENTS DO NOT MEET THE CRITERIA ESTABLISHED BY THE SECTION, BUT IT MAY BE THAT THE HARM TO VARIOUS EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS THAT WOULD BE CAUSED BY WITHDRAWING THESE DATA REQUIREMENTS, MIGHT BE GREATER THAN ANY BENEFIT TO BE GAINED FROM POSSIBLE PAPERWORK SAVINGS. THE STATUTE DOES NOT EXPLICITLY PROVIDE ANY ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM. FURTHER, WE UNDERSTAND THAT EDUCATION HAS AGREED WITH GAO'S DRAFT REPORT RECOMMENDATION THAT IT NO LONGER PUBLISH PROPOSED REQUIREMENTS AND THAT IT THEREFORE WILL NO LONGER DO SO.

QUESTION 4: CAN THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION LEGALLY PERMIT SOME OF THE "EDUCATION" REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN THE FEBRUARY 15TH FEDERAL REGISTER TO BE CLEARED BY OMB WITHOUT HIS REVIEW?

ANSWER 4: THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS EXPLICITLY REQUIRE THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION TO "REVIEW AND COORDINATE ALL COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION AND DATA ACQUISITION ACTIVITIES" BY FEDERAL AGENCIES WHEN THE RESPONDENTS ARE PRIMARILY EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS OR AGENCIES OR WHEN THE PURPOSE OF THE COLLECTION RELATES TO IMPLEMENTATION OF FEDERAL EDUCATION PROGRAMS. EVEN THOUGH THE AMENDMENTS GIVE OMB PARALLEL REVIEW RESPONSIBILITIES, THE PROPOSED INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUEST MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION BUT NEED NOT BE INDEPENDENTLY SUBMITTED TO THE DIRECTOR OF OMB. THEREFORE, EDUCATION RELATED DATA REQUIREMENTS LISTED IN THE FEBRUARY 15 FEDERAL REGISTER, THAT WERE APPROVED BY OMB BUT NOT REVIEWED BY THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, DO NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS. HOWEVER, NO PENALTIES, ENFORCEMENT CLAUSE OR OTHER REMEDIES FOR THIS NON-COMPLIANCE ARE EXPLICITLY PROVIDED BY THE STATUTE. IN CONTRAST, THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT ENCOURAGES AGENCY COMPLIANCE WITH CLEARANCE REQUIREMENTS BY PREVENTING AN AGENCY FROM IMPOSING PENALTIES FOR PUBLIC REFUSAL TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONNAIRES NOT APPROVED BY OMB. 44 U.S.C.A. SEC. 3512 (1980 LAWS SUPP). IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT FAILURE TO SUBMIT THESE INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS TO EDUCATION FOR ITS REVIEW AND APPROVAL WOULD FRUSTRATE THE CLEAR INTENT OF CONGRESS IN ITS RETENTION OF THESE PROCEDURES IN THE PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT TO HAVE EDUCATION'S EXPERTISE APPLIED TO THE DETERMINATION OF WHETHER BURDENS IMPOSED ON EDUCATIONAL AND OTHER RELATED INSTITUTIONS WOULD BE JUSTIFIED.

QUESTION 5: SOME OF THE FEBRUARY 15 LISTINGS FOR 1979-80 AND 1980 81 WERE COMPOSED OF REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY OMB. BECAUSE OF THIS APPROVAL AND THE AMOUNT OF TIME REQUIRED FOR FULL FEDAC REVIEW, THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION DETERMINED THAT AN "UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE" EXISTED WITH RESPECT TO THESE REQUIREMENTS THUS PERMITTING A WAIVER OF HIS REVIEW RESPONSIBILITY. THEREFORE, OMB-APPROVED REQUIREMENTS WERE IMPOSED IN THE 1979-80 AND 1980-81 SCHOOL YEARS WITHOUT BEING REVIEWED BY THE SECRETARY. WAS EITHER WAIVER A PROPER EXERCISE OF THE SECRETARY'S AUTHORITY?

ANSWER 5: NEITHER THE SENATE NOR HOUSE REPORTS, ACCOMPANYING THE CONTROL OF PAPERWORK AMENDMENTS, CONTAINED ANY DISCUSSION OF THE MEANING OF THE PROVISION WHICH REQUIRES THAT ALL EDUCATION DATA COLLECTION BE PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY EDUCATION NO LATER THAN FEBRUARY 15 PRECEDING EACH SCHOOL YEAR UNLESS WAIVED BY THE SECRETARY FOR "A VERY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE". THE CONFERENCE COMMITTEE MERELY CITED "ENACTMENT BY CONGRESS OF A MANDATED STUDY SUBSEQUENT TO FEBRUARY 15" AS AN EXAMPLE OF AN "UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE" PERMITTING WAIVER OF THE DEADLINE "IF SUCH STUDY IS TO BE CONDUCTED IMMEDIATELY UNDER THE LAW." H.R.REPT. NO. 95-1753, 95TH CONG., 2D SESS. (1978) 314. BUT SPECIFIC MENTION OF THIS EXAMPLE WAS WARRANTED BY THE COMMITTEE'S DELETION OF A HOUSE EXCEPTION FOR ALL CONGRESSIONALLY MANDATED STUDIES. HOWEVER, THE HOUSE REPORT STRESSED THE EDUCATION COMMITTEE'S CONCERN THAT EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS BE GIVEN SUFFICIENT LEAD TIME AND IN SETTING JANUARY 1 (SUBSEQUENTLY CHANGED TO FEBRUARY 15) AS THE DEADLINE STATED: "MORE THAN ANY OTHER PROBLEM, WITNESSES COMPLAINED THAT THEY ARE NOT GIVEN SUFFICIENT ADVANCE NOTICE OF DATA

REQUESTS TO PROPERLY GEAR UP FOR THEIR COLLECTION. LOCAL AND STATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCIES NORMALLY PLAN THEIR ANNUAL DATA COLLECTION BY THE JANUARY PRECEDING THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR. YET, OFTEN THEY ARE NOT INFORMED OF MAJOR FEDERAL COLLECTIONS UNTIL SHORTLY BEFORE OR AFTER THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR. ***

"*** THE COMMITTEE BILL, THEREFORE, STATES THAT NO INFORMATION WILL BE REQUESTED OF ANY EDUCATIONAL AGENCY THAT HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED AND PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED BY JANUARY 1 PRECEDING THE START OF THE SCHOOL YEAR IN WHICH IT IS TO BE COLLECTED, UNLESS THERE IS AN URGENT NEED FOR THE INFORMATION OR VERY UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCES. ***"

H.R.REPT. NO. 95-1137, 95TH CONG., 2D SESS. (1978) 136.

THEREFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF SPECIFIC CONGRESSIONAL GUIDANCE, THE SECRETARY OF EDUCATION HAS SOME DISCRETION IN DEFINING WHAT WOULD BE AN "UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE". HOWEVER, IN LIGHT OF REPEATED CONGRESSIONAL CONCERN OVER CENTRALIZATION OF APPROVAL AND COORDINATION OF EDUCATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS IN EDUCATION AND IN GIVING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SUFFICIENT LEAD TIME TO PROVIDE INPUT TO EDUCATIONS'S REVIEW, WE AGREE WITH MR. HEATWOLE'S POSITION THAT THE EXEMPTION OF 1980-81 REPORTING AND RECORDKEEPING REQUIREMENTS ALREADY APPROVED BY OMB APPEARS UNWARRANTED. AS THE ORIGINAL REQUIREMENT WAS NOT ENACTED UNTIL NOVEMBER 1, 1978, IT IS REASONABLE TO CONCLUDE THAT FEDAC WOULD HAVE HAD INSUFFICIENT TIME TO EVALUATE ALL 1979-80 COLLECTIONS IN 3 MONTHS AND COULD BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE FIT WITHIN THE "SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE" EXCEPTION FOR THOSE COLLECTIONS. HOWEVER, 15 MONTHS LEAD TIME FOR THE 1980-81 SCHOOL YEAR DOES NOT SEEM UNREASONABLE. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT IS NOT CLEAR WHAT WOULD BE GAINED BY A REDUNDANT APPROVAL BY FEDAC OF DATA COLLECTIONS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BY OMB EVEN THOUGH THE LAW REQUIRES THAT EDUCATION-RELATED DATA COLLECTIONS BE APPROVED BY FEDAC BEFORE BEING SUBMITTED TO OMB. IN ANY EVENT, WE WOULD HESITATE TO CRITICIZE THIS DETERMINATION ON LEGAL GROUNDS IN VIEW OF THE DISCRETION GRANTED THE SECRETARY.

QUESTION 6: UNDER 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3(D), THE SECRETARY IS REQUIRED "INSOFAR AS PRACTICABLE" TO DEVELOP AN AUTOMATED INDEXING SYSTEM TO CATALOG AVAILABLE DATA. SECTION 1221-3(B)(2)(C) STATES THAT "NO REQUEST FOR INFORMATION OR DATA WILL BE APPROVED IF SUCH INFORMATION OR DATA EXISTS IN THE SAME OR A SIMILAR FORM IN THE AUTOMATED INDEXING SYSTEM REQUIRED TO BE DEVELOPED PURSUANT TO SUBSECTION (D)." ALTHOUGH A REDUNDANCY CHECKING SYSTEM WAS DEVELOPED ABOUT 2 YEARS AGO, IT WAS NOT FUNDED, HAS ALLEGEDLY BECOME OUTDATED AND HAS NOT BEEN USED. WAS THIS JUSTIFIABLE UNDER THE "INSOFAR AS PRACTICABLE" PROVISION?

ANSWER 6: WE DO NOT HAVE SUFFICIENT FACTS ON THE REASONS WHY AND THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE REDUNDANCY CHECKING SYSTEM LACKED FUNDING TO DETERMINE IF THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN AUTOMATED INDEXING SYSTEM IS "PRACTICABLE" WITHIN THE MEANING OF 20 U.S.C. SEC. 1221-3(D). FURTHER, MR. HEATWOLE HAS INDICATED THAT, AS THE AUDIT WORK ON PAPERWORK ISSUES RELATED TO EDUCATION HAS DEVELOPED, THIS SYSTEM IS NO LONGER A MAJOR CONCERN.

DRAFT LEGISLATION

MR. HEATWOLE ALSO ASKED US TO DRAFT LEGISLATION THAT WOULD ENACT GAO'S RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS BASED ON AUDIT FINDINGS THAT EDUCATION IS INEFFECTIVE IN ITS EXERCISE OF REVIEW FUNCTIONS, TO LIMIT EDUCATION'S REVIEW OF INFORMATION COLLECTION REQUIREMENTS TO THOSE OF ITS OWN DEPARTMENT. THE NECESSARY AMENDMENTS FOLLOW:

(A) SECTION 400A OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT IS AMENDED BY (1) AMENDING SUBSECTION (A)(1)(A) TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

"(A) IN ORDER TO ELIMINATE EXCESSIVE DETAIL AND UNNECESSARY AND REDUNDANT INFORMATION REQUESTS AND TO ACHIEVE THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION IN THE MOST EFFICIENT AND EFFECTIVE POSSIBLE MANNER, THE SECRETARY SHALL COORDINATE THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION AND DATA ACQUISITION ACTIVITIES OF THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.",

(2) BY INSERTING A PERIOD AFTER "COSTLY" AND DELETING THE REMAINDER OF THE LAST SENTENCE IN SUBSECTION (A)(3)(A),

(3) BY STRIKING OUT "HEADS OF FEDERAL AGENCIES" AFTER "TO THE" IN SUBSECTION (A)(3)(C) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "DEPARTMENT'S PROGRAM OFFICIALS",

(4) BY STRIKING OUT "ASSIST EACH FEDERAL AGENCY IN PERFORMING THE REVIEW AND COORDINATION REQUIRED BY THIS SECTION AND SHALL REQUIRE OF EACH AGENCY"

AFTER "SECRETARY SHALL" IN SUBSECTION (B)(1) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "REQUIRE OF PROGRAM OFFICIALS",

(5) BY STRIKING OUT "FEDERAL AGENCIES" AFTER "COSTS TO" IN SUBSECTION (B)(1)(D) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "THE DEPARTMENT",

(6) BY STRIKING OUT "ANY FEDERAL AGENCY" AFTER "BY" IN SUBSECTION (B)(5)(B) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "THE DEPARTMENT",

(7) AMENDING SUBSECTION (B)(5)(D) TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

"(D) THE PLANS FOR THE STUDY HAVE BEEN ANNOUNCED IN THE FEDERAL REGISTER.",

AND DELETING THE REMAINDER OF THE SUBSECTION,

(8) BY STRIKING OUT "FEDERAL AGENCIES" AFTER "BY" IN SUBSECTION (C) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "THE DEPARTMENT",

(9) BY STRIKING OUT "ALL AVAILABLE" AFTER "CATALOGING" IN SUBSECTION (D)(2) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "DEPARTMENT",

(10) AMENDING SUBSECTION (D)(4) TO READ AS FOLLOWS:

"(4) PUBLISH ANNUALLY A LISTING OF DEPARTMENT DATA REQUESTS, WHICH SHALL INCLUDE THE PROGRAM FOR WHICH SUCH DATA HAS BEEN REQUESTED WITH ITS APPROPRIATION AND WITH THE DATA BURDEN RESULTING FROM EACH SUCH REQUEST; AND", AND

(11) BY STRIKING OUT "REQUIRE THE FEDERAL AGENCY PROPOSING THE COLLECTION OF INFORMATION OR DATA ACQUISITION ACTIVITY TO IDENTIFY IN ITS DATA" IN SUBSECTION (D)(5) AND INSERTING IN LIEU THEREOF "IDENTIFY IN EACH PROPOSED DATA COLLECTION."

(B) SECTION 400AA)(3)(B) OF THE GENERAL EDUCATION PROVISIONS ACT IS REPEALED.